Talking about slow, did anyone see the Saprissa v Impact game last night ? Aubrey David game ? Thoughts ! I think pace is a deceptive issue when a team is able to control properly , hold formation and make accurate passes. Opposing players closed down, no panic by offensive player, just a casual knock to the open offensive support. That's technical ability. What we have a talent, what we don't have is football technical ability. What that game lacked was creativity and offensive aggression. Yet one must consider Impact seemed to play for the tie, still their goalie had to make 2 crucial saves. That's his job and he did it well. What pace did Aubrey have to display ? None, imo. He ALWAYS had support.
Thierry Henry either before the 1st leg or just after it (I think before) had very good things to say about Aubrey's coach. He liked what he viewed as 'borrowings' from Pep in the team's identity and idea of how to build play. But, that's the fruit of a LOT of work on the training ground. Clubs have that time.
Of course, you are referring to a different "pace" than what lefty was referencing in the other thread ... nonetheless, the highlighted is generally irrefutable. The problem, however, in the experience of the NT is evidence of altering playing speed and rhythm to control matches. Holding formation and making accurate passes consistently across changes in rhythm is elusive at NT level.
What are your thoughts of why this is so ? Given that most of the selects do play in leagues/teams where this is so predominant.
An easy go-to response would be to say it's because the teams don't have much time to work with during international match windows, but that's not the response I'm going to give you.
I don't think that it's a reality that impacts all teams evenly. a. Certainly player quality is a factor for any team but the qualities/characteristics of players in certain positions and roles is influential. Who is in central midfield matters. Who are his outlet players matters. What they do with the ball matters. To be able to adjust how the game ticks, these players must dictate play. They have to impose rather than merely respond. And dictating play is a function of a team's ambition in advanced areas of the pitch. On the first score, I would say Hyland is a player inclined to be imposing. But, he's been placed into several scenarios where he has had to make sacrifices for the team. Regardless, all of our recent coaches have been faced with prioritizing the balance to be struck in midfield and that balance has tended to tip towards defensive balance rather than offensive balance. From there it's clear that this impacts ambitions in the final 1/3 and frequency of chances.
Other considerations:b. domestic training games and prep matches do not sufficiently present opponents playing at the heightened/variable tempo that would in turn cause the NT to be effectively challenged to trigger the necessary changes in speed and rhythm that are triggered by opposition tactics. Generally these matches in terms of offensive considerations are probing affairs ... looking for vertical seams, nothing more, aside from his okay is built.
Offensively dictating requires possession and you know our history and challenges with maintaining possession.
Appreciate your in depth analysis
Would you say
a. 1st Team Selections and Tactics.
b. How about maintaining a available local select pool of trialists (not necessarily always the exact selects. ~25 selects) to monthly attend weekend camps (with a small expense stipend - maybe sw.net can partially sponsor such.~$5 TT a mth/member), under the supervision of the NT coaches and bi-monthl(every 2 mths) test against the leading Pro-league team at the time. Open to public at a small cover charge
Am I off track here ?
Regarding (b), as I understand it the structure put in place by Look Loy for the national age group teams is targeted to what you describe ... revenue streaming aside (as it should be excluded at age group level; I'm referring to the NT pool of players and then the possibility of reaching into the regional talent pools as well).
With harmonized training we should get harmonized outcomes. On this specific aspect of the game, if we train it ... we'll get the benefit of players whose selection depends on if they are able to to influence games.
This is part of why the players in these pools should not merely be observed. They should also have written evaluations that cover all aspects of the game. That's of benefit if there is change in staff, for monitoring progress over time objectively, for the benefit of a coach's own reflection and for meaningful reference in communicating with players and their coaches outside of the NT/regional set-up what the player needs to improve. It's also useful for the TD and oversight.
In terms of the NT, I wouldn't suggest the route of playing the best domestic team but of using a core of 40 odd players (seniors and U23s/20s and the odd precocious 17+ y/o), playing in-house consistently (under the NT umbrella against each other). That way you are training two teams simultaneously and preserving the integrity and consistency of the benchmarks for selection and learning. Everything depends on in-house control. Playing the best club team contradicts my point, but moreso is less useful in our environment than it would be in another country.
I'm talking about two teams each with a mix of the best senior, U-23, U-20, and U-17 talent. The compositions of the teams can move between each other to strike and find competitive balances or suit tactical objectives.
We often associate dictating matches with teams that understand their playing identity/DNA, have more or less perfected how they win matches and that consistently pose dangers to opponents even when they are under the scoreline.vBut there is a tendency to believe that dictating rhythm/speed is a natural by-product of good teams and quality players and that it isn't trained. As you know, not so.
A good team can knock a ball around and preserve possession but that possession can have no bearing on influencing playing rhythm or advancing offensive/defensive objectives if not purposeful.
Yuh know how practically anyone who learned the game in the past 50 years traditionally would have learned how his/her team was expected to play if they became a player down (10 v11) or two down (9 v 11)? Why was that done?
Yet, some coaches in the modern era don't do it because the other work they've inculcated covers the above situations without the need to be explicit. And if we think about it, the 10 v 11 and 9 v 11 situations implicate considerations that come up in focusing exclusively on speed, rhythm, tempo and tactical recognition of what's actually happening on the pitch.
A huge part of scouting/evaluation is the psychological profile of the player. People tend to understand fragile physiques but they underestimate fragile playing/player psychology and it's a key determinant in who gets brought from country to town to learn the game and sign on the dotted line. Some of these ppl make mistakes with overemphasising the relevance of physique and underappreciating the relevance of strength. Will leave it there.